Recently the WSJ published a deeply flawed argument for keeping racist monuments in public spaces. Basically, the argument is that since churches celebrate flawed saints, then public land should be used to celebrate racist heroes of a racist rebel cause (and if we don't, we are forsaking our "history"). Some points of contradiction:
1. Biblical figures are celebrated in Churches, not on public lands. If there are statues or stained glass of them, they are on private property, not celebrated as public goods in public places. At least not in the USA.
2. In the Biblical tradition, flawed characters like Moses or David or Peter or Mary undergo repentance and transformation of life. Confederate slave owners died un-repentant and committed to the "Lost Cause".
3. We do not learn Biblical history primarily by looking at pictures or statues of Biblical characters, but by studying and explaining the TEXT of the Bible.
4. Likewise, people do not learn history by doing a tour of statues, most of which were built decades after the fact, in places that are usually not relevant to the events in their lives. No one ever took a high school or college history class that consisted in touring monuments to get the "real story" of history. They learn History, like they learn Scripture, primarily by studying texts and primary sources.
5. Statues are neither texts nor primary sources, and are thus irrelevant to studying and understanding history. Instead, statues and monuments are power claims, which represent dominant ideologies, celebrate leaders we should imitate, and proclaim the values that are important for a community. If our stated commitments in the USA are to uphold the "inalienable rights" of all people, and pursue "liberty and justice for all", then this is patently opposed to publicly celebrating unrepentant rebels who died upholding values which are against our national ideals.
I have published a more rational and useful course of action for Confederate Monuments in a previous post.
No comments:
Post a Comment